9/11 conspiracy theories

[venger]

I say worse stuff simply because this 9/11 conspiracy bull isn't shocking. The only people getting excited are those with the over-exuberant imaginations who just can't get the fantasy of a massive murderous conspiracy out of their deluded minds.

 

What you mean like going to War with Iraq ?

 

You are just digging a wider hole here Bartfast.

 

I trust your experience in your field, but beyond that you can mostly be proven wrong.

[Bartfarst]

Quote: Bartfarst

Based on your comments, I must infer that you have not the slightest shred of understanding of how the building was constructed or the effect that a 3.7GJ impact and 50 tons of kerosene could have on it.

 

im learning fast though!

 

and fortunately it seems, not from your good self. again, when you have the chance, check my link out above ^^

 

in the meantime, these are the main guys disagreeing with you:

 

http://www.physics911.net/spine.htm

 

and this is another article; i believe the guy is an architect and builder, so perhaps he knows more about contruction than me...:

 

http://www.physics911.net/closerlook.htm

 

I managed to get into a couple of the links. The Dave Heller article is 'pants' – I can't think of a better word for it. He quotes melting points for steel structures and totally ignoring the fact that the steal becomes annealed at much lower temperatures - the offical explanation doesn't claim that melting caused the failure, it correctly explains how steel becomes more malleable when it gets very hot. He also says that the pancake theory doesn’t explain the speed at which the towers dropped, but his explanation is schoolboy physics and would also not explain how quickly they dropped if blasted. If this guy is a graduate physicist and architect, he must have graduated at the University of Rangoon. His arguments are worse than weak, they are drivel.

 

And Tony summed it up over David Shayler.

[venger]

Try to look at this from the doubters' perspective. You were willing to believe that the Americans had shot down 59 airliners since 1970 as a result of a misquoted bit of hearsay by one woman being interviewed we just can’t take your position seriously.

 

That woman happened to be a former Transportation Department inspector general who handled FISA cases as a Justice Department attorney in the 1980s.

 

I personally think she will know more about the US airline industry than most anyone in the UK.

 

Not an interview, it was a statement for a press conference and furthermore it was my mistake, not hers.

 

As for 'we' taking my position seriously, that is the only point thus far that you have been able to exploit.

 

Have you even looked at a decriptive timeline of the events of 9/11 or the links that I have posted ?

[Bartfarst]

That woman happened to be a former Transportation Department inspector general who handled FISA cases as a Justice Department attorney in the 1980s.

 

I personally think she will know more about the US airline industry than most anyone in the UK.

 

Not an interview, it was a statement for a press conference and furthermore it was my mistake, not hers.

 

As for 'we' taking my position seriously, that is the only point thus far that you have been able to exploit.

Have you even looked at a decriptive timeline of the events of 9/11 or the links that I have posted ?

 

 

No, it isn't.

 

I, and Tony, have given you good solid answers to the majority of the bizarre claims you've made, but I might as well be talking Swahili for all the difference it makes.

 

As for the timeline, I've not seen that one (I monitor the thread in fits and starts) but unless it's all verified information, not gathered from various loony self-proclaimed offical experts, it's worth jack.

[Tony]

If this guy is a graduate physicist and architect, he must have graduated at the University of Rangoon. His arguments are worse than weak, they are drivel.

The 140 year old Rangoon University has a rather good reputation, and it's (former) students are rather more subversive than the armchair scientists quoted

 

I'm not sure what other conspiracy points are still outstanding without adequate explanation?

[venger]

 

I'm not sure what other conspiracy points are still outstanding without adequate explanation?

 

You are kidding me

 

Being co-admin, do you think it posiible to set a pol when this thread is broken up please, something like:

 

Twin towers - do you support an independent enquiry?

 

1. yes

 

2. no

 

3. not decided

 

4. not bothered/other

 

There are plenty of ponits not covered here Tony, I am restricted for time just now but how about the poll for starters please chief

[Tony]

I'm not sure how an SF poll could be realistic unless people have made some sort of study or have some level of knowledge. You might get the same results from asking "Do you trust the Government?". It's pointless and has no bearing.

 

The only people who want an enquiry are those who think the Government is up to something. I for one don't see the need for an independent enquiry as it would be a sheer waste of public money - I assume you want it publicly funding BTW? If it was privately funded who would pay for it and would you accept the outcome? That raises the issue that 99.9% of conspiracists wouldn't accept the outcome of an enquiry, whether public or private.

 

Does this sound like it would become boringly cyclical and pointless?

[Phanerothyme]

Tony, did you just put the words "realistic" and "SF poll" in the same sentence?

[Longcol]

Tony, did you just put the words "realistic" and "SF poll" in the same sentence?

 

I think he did

 

Anybody for" 9/11 conspiracy theorists" and "logic" in the same encyclopaedia?

[venger]

I'm not sure how an SF poll could be realistic unless people have made some sort of study or have some level of knowledge. You might get the same results from asking "Do you trust the Government?". It's pointless and has no bearing.

 

The only people who want an enquiry are those who think the Government is up to something. I for one don't see the need for an independent enquiry as it would be a sheer waste of public money - I assume you want it publicly funding BTW? If it was privately funded who would pay for it and would you accept the outcome? That raises the issue that 99.9% of conspiracists wouldn't accept the outcome of an enquiry, whether public or private.

 

Does this sound like it would become boringly cyclical and pointless?

 

So that is a NO then ?

 

Everything on the forum has a point or bearing to you does it ?

 

"The only people who want an enquiry are those who think the Government is up to something." Are you sure about that ? Post a poll !

 

A waste of public money you say, Governments don't need suggestions for that, they can do it all by themselves.

 

Yourself and Bartfast have demonstrated such arrogance on this thread !

 

We are talking about a massive crime to humanity if proven correct, (which has more support than you clearly understand) that has affected the the World.

 

You call that pointless ?